User interface style guide compliance reporting

ABSTRACT

This disclosure provides various embodiments for generating reports relating to UI models&#39; compliance with a set of UI style guide rules. A digital UI model is parsed to determine whether a user interface, in a plurality of user interfaces within a software environment, satisfies at least one UI style guide rule in a plurality of UI style guide rules associated with the software environment. The digital UI model defines a plurality of attributes of the user interface. At least one statistical measure is calculated relating to compliance with UI style guide rules. The calculation of the statistical measure is based at least in part on the determination of whether the user interface satisfies the at least one UI style guide rule. A report is then generated identifying the at least one statistical measure, the report configured for presentation on a user interface of a computing device.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This present disclosure relates to software application user interfaces,and more particularly to handling violations of user-interface-relatedconsistency rules.

BACKGROUND

Modern software applications, adapted for use with human users,typically employ at least one user interface to display data, controls,media, and other information to the user. Software application userinterfaces (or “user interfaces,” or “UIs”) can also be interactive,allowing a user to interact with elements, controls, and data displayedon a graphical user interface device via a keyboard, mouse, touchscreen,and other devices. In some modern software applications and services, asingle program or application can include several different userinterfaces that can be displayed to and interacted with by the user.Further, in some enterprise software solutions offering or servingdozens of different software programs and services to end users,hundreds, and even thousands of related user interfaces can be providedand maintained within the software environment.

As computing and software markets mature, the development of userinterfaces for software solutions and systems has grown moresophisticated. For instance, user experience design principles have beenintegrated into the design of modern software products. User experiencedesign is user-centered, focusing on designing products, in this casesoftware, with a primary focus on the user's experience and interactionwith the product. User experience (or “UX”) design principles aim tomake users' interactions as simple, efficient, and enjoyable aspossible. Considerations of user experience design can include variousdimensions including the look, feel, access to tools and services, andcommunication and co-operation support provided through the userinterface. Indeed, international standard (e.g., ISO 9241) haveestablished describing interface design requirements for usability.

Some products have been developed to assist product designers inrealizing user-centered design, such as user interface prototyping andsimulation tools. In some cases, software user interface designsolutions can be proposed and promoted through a user interface styleguide defining rules, conventions, preferences, and guidelines for userinterfaces within a system. In some cases, user interface style guidecan also focus on maintaining user interface consistency across asoftware product, for example, to promote a consistent particularproduct appearance, familiar user controls, or maintain a product tradedress.

SUMMARY

This disclosure provides various embodiments for generating reportsrelating to UI models' compliance with a set of UI style guide rules. Adigital UI model can be parsed to determine whether a user interface, ina plurality of user interfaces within a software environment, satisfiesat least one UI style guide rule in a plurality of UI style guide rulesassociated with the software environment. The digital UI model candefine a plurality of attributes of the user interface. At least onestatistical measure can be calculated relating to compliance with UIstyle guide rules. The calculation of the statistical measure can bebased at least in part on the determination of whether the userinterface satisfies the at least one UI style guide rule. A report canthen be generated identifying the at least one statistical measure, thereport configured for presentation on a user interface of a computingdevice.

While generally described as computer implemented software thatprocesses and transforms the respective data, some or all of the aspectsmay be computer implemented methods or further included in respectivesystems or other devices for performing this described functionality.The details of these and other aspects and embodiments of the presentdisclosure are set forth in the accompanying drawings and thedescription below. Other features, objects, and advantages of thedisclosure will be apparent from the description and drawings, and fromthe claims.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates an example system including a UI rules engine.

FIG. 2 is a schematic representation of an example UI rules engine.

FIG. 3A is a representation of an example use of a digital UI model togenerate a runtime UI.

FIG. 3B is a representation of a snippet of an example parsable UI modeldata file.

FIG. 3C is a representation of a snippet of an example UI style guiderule check script.

FIG. 4 is a representation of an example use of a UI rule check scriptto parse a batch of digital UI models to generate UI consistency checkdata.

FIG. 5A is a flowchart of an example technique for checking attributesof a UI for compliance with one or more UI style guide rules.

FIG. 5B is a flowchart of an example technique for checking attributesof a UI for compliance with one or more UI style guide rules inconnection with an example UI development tool.

FIG. 5C is a flowchart of an example technique for generating UI ruleconsistency statistics based on checks of UI models representing UIs ina software environment.

FIG. 5D is a flowchart of an example technique for forecasting effectsof a change involving one or more UI style guide rules.

FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate example screenshots of UIs used in connectionwith an example UI rules engine.

Like reference symbols in the various drawings indicate like elements.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Developing user interfaces (UIs) for software applications can be anexpensive and resource-intensive process. Further, developing UIs withinan existing software application environment can be further complicatedby efforts to maintain consistency across all user interfaces in anapplication or software environment. Software products are rarely statichowever, and designers can opt for modifications to existing or previousUIs. Propagating these changes across each and every UI within amulti-UI system can be challenging and, in some cases, requireredevelopment of one or more user interfaces in the system. Indeed, inlarge software environments, such as distributed enterprise softwaresystems employing thousands of UIs within the system, making changes toand discovering inconsistencies among the design of the multiple UI canbe prohibitively burdensome.

In some instances, parsable, digital UI models can be used to modelattributes of user interfaces within a software environment. Forinstance, the location, labeling, color, size, and formatting of variousUI elements within a particular UI can be described and defined withinthe UI model. Similar UI models can be generated and maintained for eachUI within a particular software environment. A common UI style guide canbe employed for UIs within the environment, with a plurality ofexecutable UI rule check scripts being maintained and made available toautomatically check the UI models to determine whether particular UIs inthe environment are in violation of one or more UI style guide rules.Such UI rule check scripts can be integrated within UI development toolsto further give users immediate feedback regarding UI design choices andcan further be the basis of UI development planning and consistencyreporting within the context of a UI design time effort. UI rule checkscripts can facilitate quick and system-wide UI style guide ruleconsistency checks and can facilitate mass modifications of UI models tocorrect violations of UI style guide rules.

Turning to the example implementation of FIG. 1, the illustratedsoftware environment 100 includes, or is communicably coupled with, oneor more clients 102, 104, one or more application servers (e.g., 106,108), such as application servers within an enterprise softwareenvironment, and one or more data repositories (e.g., 112, 114, 116),using one or more networks 120. The environment 100 can further includea UI rule engine 110 adapted to manage and facilitate consistency checkson multiple UI models (e.g., 130, 132, 134) modeling UIs (e.g., 126,128) within the software environment 100, as well as a UI developmenttool 118. Each of servers 106, 108, UI rule engine 110, and UIdevelopment tool 118 can comprise electronic computing devices operableto receive, transmit, process, store, or manage data and informationassociated with the software environment 100. As used in this document,the term “computer” is intended to encompass any suitable processingdevice. For example, the environment 100 may be implemented usingcomputers other than servers, including a server pool. Further, any,all, or some of the servers 106, 108 may be adapted to execute anyoperating system, including Linux, UNIX, Windows Server, or any othersuitable operating system.

UI rule engine 110 can access and, in some examples, modify one or moreUI models (e.g., 130, 132, 134) and UI rule check scripts (e.g., 136,138) stored in and/or served by one or more data repositories 112, 114,116. For example, the UI rule engine can retrieve and execute one ormore UI rule check scripts (e.g., 136, 138) to parse one or more UImodels (e.g., 130, 132, 134) to determine whether UIs (e.g., 126, 128)modeled by the UI models (e.g., 130, 132, 134) satisfy UI rules, such asUI style guide rules, corresponding to the UI rule check scripts (e.g.,136, 138). UIs 126, 128 can be UIs of one or more applications andservices (e.g., 120, 122) served by application servers 106, 108 toclients 102, 104. Result data (e.g., 139) can be generated based on theexecution of the UI rule check scripts (e.g., 136, 138) and stored indata repositories (e.g., 114) for use, for example, by UI rule engine inperforming reporting and further analysis of UI style guide compliance.

In some instances, UI rule engine 110 can operate in connection with aUI development framework 118. UI development framework can includesoftware and systems adapted to develop and modify UIs, for example, ina graphical development environment. Design decisions implemented for aUI under development using the UI development framework can be analyzedusing UI rule engine to provide feedback regarding the design decision'sconsistency with UI style guide rules. In some instances, UI rule enginecan be integrated with UI development framework 118 and UI developmentframework 118 can access and modify UI models (e.g., 130, 132, 134) inconnection with development of a UI corresponding to the UI model.

Application servers 106, 108 can each include one or more processors140, 142, at least one interface 146, 148, and computer-readable memory150, 152. Application servers can be configured to serve web services(e.g., 120, 122), such as SOA-based or enterprise web services, forexample. In some instances, some combination of application servers 106,108 can be hosted on a common computing system, server, or server pool,and share computing resources, including shared memory, processors, andinterfaces, such as in an enterprise software system serving services toa plurality of distinct clients and customers. The interfaces 146, 148can be used for communicating with other systems in a client-server orother distributed environment (including within environment 100)connected to the network 120, for example the one or more clients 102,104, external data sources (e.g., 116), or any other computing deviceadapted to interface with the servers 106, 108, including devices notillustrated in FIG. 1. Generally, each interface 146, 148 compriseslogic encoded in software and/or hardware in a suitable combination andoperable to communicate with the network 120. More specifically, theinterfaces 146, 148 may comprise software supporting one or morecommunication protocols associated with communications such that thenetwork 120 or hardware is operable to communicate physical signalswithin and outside of the illustrated software environment 100.

Each processor 140, 142 can execute instructions and manipulate data toperform the operations of an associated server or system (e.g., 106,108) and may comprise, for example, a central processing unit (CPU), ablade, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or afield-programmable gate array (FPGA), among other suitable options.Although each processor 140, 142 is illustrated as a single processor,multiple processors may be used according to the particular needs of theassociated server. References to a single processor 140, 142 are meantto include multiple processors where applicable. The operations thateach processor 140, 142 executes are determined by the purpose andoperations of its associated server. Generally, the processor 140, 142executes instructions and manipulates data to perform the operations ofits respective server and, specifically, the software systems, services,and applications hosted by the servers 106, 108.

At a high level, each “server” (e.g., 106, 108) includes one or moreelectronic computing devices operable to receive, transmit, process,store, or manage data and information associated with the environment100. Specifically, a server is responsible for receiving requests fromone or more clients and sending the appropriate response to therequesting client. In addition to requests from external clients,requests may also be sent from internal users, external or third-partycustomers, other automated applications, as well as any otherappropriate entities, individuals, systems, or computers. For example,although FIG. 1 illustrates each server as a single server, a server canbe implemented using two or more servers, as well as computers otherthan servers, including a server pool. Indeed, a server may be anycomputer or processing device such as, for example, a blade server,general-purpose personal computer (PC), Macintosh, workstation,UNIX-based workstation, or any other suitable device. In other words,the present disclosure contemplates computers other than general purposecomputers, as well as computers without conventional operating systems.Further, servers may be adapted to execute any operating system,including Linux, UNIX, Windows, Mac OS, or any other suitable operatingsystem.

In the case of servers hosting, serving, or otherwise providing softwareservices or products, a processor (e.g., 140, 142) can execute thefunctionality required to receive and respond to requests from clients,as well as client applications interfacing with the server's hostedapplication (e.g., 120, 122). It will be understood that the term“application server” (e.g., 106, 108) can include any suitable softwarecomponent or module, or computing device(s) capable of hosting and/orserving a software application, including distributed, enterprise, orcloud-based software applications. Regardless of the particularimplementation, “software” may include computer-readable instructions,firmware, wired or programmed hardware, or any combination thereof on atangible medium operable when executed to perform at least the processesand operations described herein. Indeed, each software component may befully or partially written or described in any appropriate computerlanguage including C, C++, Java, Visual Basic, assembler, Perl, anysuitable version of 4GL, as well as others. Applications can beimplemented as individual modules that implement the various featuresand functionality through various objects, methods, or other processes,or may instead include a number of sub-modules, third party services,components, libraries, and such, as appropriate. Conversely, thefeatures and functionality of various components can be combined intosingle components as appropriate.

At a high level, each of the one or more hosted applications andservices (e.g., 120, 122) illustrated in the environment 100 can includeany application, program, module, process, or other software that mayexecute, change, delete, generate, or otherwise manage informationaccording to the present disclosure, particularly in response to and inconnection with one or more requests received from the illustratedclients 102, 104, as well as other applications. In certain cases, onlyone hosted application may be located at a particular server. In others,a plurality of related and/or unrelated hosted applications may bestored at a single server, or located across a plurality of otherservers, as well. In certain cases, environment 100 may implement acomposite hosted application. For example, portions of the compositeapplication may be implemented as Enterprise Java Beans (EJBs) ordesign-time components may have the ability to generate run-timeimplementations into different platforms, such as J2EE (Java 2 Platform,Enterprise Edition), ABAP (Advanced Business Application Programming)objects, or Microsoft's .NET, among others. Additionally, applicationsmay represent web-based applications accessed and executed via thenetwork 120 (e.g., through the Internet). Further, one or more processesassociated with a particular hosted application or service may bestored, referenced, or executed remotely. For example, a portion of aparticular hosted application or service may be a web service associatedwith the application that is remotely called, while another portion ofthe hosted application may be an interface object or agent bundled forprocessing at a remote client (e.g., 102, 104). Moreover, any or all ofthe hosted applications and software service may be a child orsub-module of another software module or enterprise application (notillustrated) without departing from the scope of this disclosure. Stillfurther, portions of a hosted application can be executed by a userworking directly at a server hosting the application, as well asremotely at a client.

Each of the example servers 106, 108 can also include a memory (150, 152respectively). Further repositories 112, 114, 116 and client computingdevices (e.g., 102, 104) can also each include at least one memorydevice. Each memory may include any memory or database module and maytake the form of volatile or non-volatile memory including, withoutlimitation, non-transitory memory elements, magnetic media, opticalmedia, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), removablemedia, or any other suitable local or remote memory component. Eachmemory may further store various objects or data, including classes,frameworks, applications, backup data, business objects, jobs, webpages, web page templates, database tables, content repositories storingbusiness or other dynamic information, or other information includingany parameters, variables, algorithms, instructions, rules, constraints,or references thereto relevant to the purposes of the particular server.Each memory may also include any other appropriate data, such as VPNapplications, firmware logs and policies, firewall policies, a securityor access log, print or other reporting files, as well as others. Again,the particular data and instructions stored in each memory (e.g., 112,114, 116, 150, 152) will be described in detail below in connection withthe illustrated implementations of the software environment 100 andcomponents thereof.

Generally, the network 120 facilitates wireless or wirelinecommunications between the components of the software environment 100(e.g., between the UI rule engine 110, data repositories 112, 114, 116and one or more clients (e.g., 102, 104) as well as between othercomponents as appropriate), as well as with any other local or remotecomputer, such as those associated with one or more applications orexternal data sources. The network 120 can be implemented as one or moredistinct networks. In any implementation, the network 120 may be acontinuous or discontinuous network without departing from the scope ofthis disclosure, so long as at least a portion of the network 120 mayfacilitate communications between senders and recipients. The network120 may be all or a portion of an enterprise or secured network. As anexample, in FIG. 1 networks 120 may represent a portion of an enterprisenetwork, or a connection to the Internet. In some instances, a portionof the network 120 may be a virtual private network (VPN). All or aportion of the network 120 can comprise either a wireline or wirelesslink. Example wireless links may include 802.11a/b/g/n, 802.20, WiMax,and/or any other appropriate wireless link. In other words, the network120 encompasses any internal or external network, networks, sub-network,or combination thereof operable to facilitate communications betweenvarious computing components inside and outside the illustratedenvironment 100. The network 120 may communicate, for example, InternetProtocol (IP) packets, Frame Relay frames, Asynchronous Transfer Mode(ATM) cells, voice, video, data, and other suitable information betweennetwork addresses. The network 120 may also include one or more localarea networks (LANs), radio access networks (RANs), metropolitan areanetworks (MANs), wide area networks (WANs), all or a portion of theInternet, and/or any other communication system or systems at one ormore locations.

The illustrated implementation of FIG. 1 includes one or more localand/or remote clients 102, 104. A client 102, 104 can be any computingdevice operable to connect or communicate at least with an applicationserver 106, 108, and/or the network 120 using a wireline or wirelessconnection. Each client 102, 104 includes at least one GUI (e.g., 160,162). In general, the client 102, 104 comprises an electronic computingdevice operable to receive, transmit, process, and store any appropriatedata associated with the software environment of FIG. 1. It will beunderstood that there may be any number of clients 102, 104 associatedwith environment 100, as well as any number of clients 102, 104 externalto environment 100. Further, the term “client” and “user” may be usedinterchangeably as appropriate without departing from the scope of thisdisclosure. Moreover, while each client 102, 104 is described in termsof being used by one user, this disclosure contemplates that many usersmay use one computer or that one user may use multiple computers. Asused in this disclosure, the client 102, 104 is intended to encompass apersonal computer, electronic notepad, touch screen terminal,workstation, network computer, kiosk, wireless data port, smart phone,personal data assistant (PDA), one or more processors within these orother devices, or any other suitable processing device. For example, theclient 102, 104 may comprise a computer that includes an input device,such as a keypad, touch screen, mouse, or other device that can acceptinformation, and an output device that conveys information associatedwith operations of one or more applications stored and/or executed on anapplication server (or other servers in environment 100) or on theclient 102, 104 itself, including digital data, visual information, orGUI 160, 162. Both the input device and the output device may includefixed or removable storage media such as a magnetic computer disk,CD-ROM, or other suitable media to both receive input from and provideoutput to users of the clients 102, 104 through the display, namely theGUI 160, 162.

The GUI 160, 162 comprises a graphical user interface operable to allowthe user to interface with at least a portion of environment 100 for anysuitable purpose, including allowing a user to interact with one or moresoftware applications and services (e.g., 120, 122). Generally, the GUI160, 162 provides users with an efficient and user-friendly presentationof data provided by or communicated within the system, such as UI of theUI development framework 118 or an application managed using UI ruleengine 110 or developed using UI development framework 118. The term“graphical user interface,” or GUI, may be used in the singular or inthe plural to describe one or more graphical user interfaces and each ofthe displays of a particular graphical user interface. Therefore, theGUI 160, 162 can be any graphical user interface, such as a web browser,touch screen, or command line interface (CLI) that processes informationin the environment 100 and efficiently presents the results to the user.In general, UIs displayed using the GUI 160, 162 may include a pluralityof user interface (UI) elements such as interactive fields, pull-downlists, media players, tables, graphics, virtual machine interfaces,buttons, etc. operable by the user at the client. These UI elements maybe related to the functions of one or more applications or services(e.g., 120, 122), including applications hosted locally at the client.

While FIG. 1 is described as containing or being associated with aplurality of elements, not all elements illustrated within environment100 of FIG. 1 may be utilized in each alternative implementation of thepresent disclosure. Additionally, one or more of the elements describedherein may be located external to environment 100, while in otherinstances, certain elements may be included within or as a portion ofone or more of the other described elements, as well as other elementsnot described in the illustrated implementation. Further, certainelements illustrated in FIG. 1 may be combined with other components, aswell as used for alternative or additional purposes in addition to thosepurposes described herein.

FIG. 2 is a schematic representation of an example UI rules engine 200.The UI rules engine 200 can access a plurality of UI models 205, UI rulecheck scripts 210, as well as check result data 215 to perform variousoperations relating to checking and maintaining UI style guideconsistency across a plurality of software application UIs modeled bythe UI models 205. A UI rule check can be performed, for example, by arule check module 225. In this particular example, a rule check module225 can identify and retrieve UI models pertaining to a particular rulecheck. For instance, rule check module 225 can identify that the rulecheck is to be performed on a particular application having acorresponding set of UIs. Accordingly, rule check module 225 canidentify those UI models 205 corresponding to and modeling attributes ofthe particular application's UIs. The rule check module 225 can furtheridentify those UI rule check scripts 210 needed to perform the check.Each UI rule check script 210 can correspond to a particular UI styleguide rule. Accordingly, the rule check module 225 can identify those UIrule check scripts 210 corresponding to the set of UI style guide rulesagainst which the relevant set of UIs is to be checked for compliance.

As shown in FIG. 3A, each UI rule check script 210 can be executed toparse each identified UI model (e.g., 205 a-d) to identifycharacteristics of each UIs' attributes and determine whether the UI'sattributes satisfy the UI style guide rule represented by the UI rulecheck script 210. For instance, FIG. 3B illustrates a snippet 305 of anXML-based, parsable, digital UI model of a particular UI to be parsed bya UI rule check script 210, including the snippet 310 of an example UIrule check script shown in FIG. 3C. As shown in FIG. 3B, a highlightedportion 315 (highlighted for purposes of convenience in illustrating thepresent example and not necessarily as a feature in an actual UI model)relates to a text used in a title field of a particular UI elementwithin a UI modeled by the UI model. In this example, the UI modelspecifies, among several other attributes, that a title field attributeof the UI is to include the words “Details: Line Items of (0),” where“(0)” designates a placeholder for additional text. Turning to FIG. 3C,the UI rule check script corresponding to at least one UI style guiderule relating to title fields of a UI, includes a check (shown inhighlighted portion 320) corresponding to a UI style guide rule thatsuch title fields begin with the words “Details:”. In this example, ifthe UI rule check script check (of 320) identifies that the title fielddoes not begin with the word “Details:”, a message is returnedindicating that the rule has been violated and that the violation has a“High” priority. Accordingly, in the example of the UI model at leastpartially illustrated in FIG. 3B, the highlighted title field attribute315 in snippet 305 does begin with the word “Details:” and, as a result,when the portion 320 of the UI rule check script snippet 310 is executedto parse highlighted portion 315, the UI rule check script does notgenerate the message indicating that the highlighted title fieldattribute 315 violates the UI style guide rule requiring that the titlefield begin with “Details:”. In other examples, UI rule check scripts210 can be configured to return check result data 215 positivelyidentifying whether the UI, modeled by the UI model 205, satisfies orviolates the underlying UI style guide rule. Check result data 215 canbe stored to record historical compliance with UI style guide rules, aswell as for use by UI rule engine 200, as will be explained in furtherdetail below.

Returning to FIG. 2, a UI rule engine 200 can further be operable togenerate reports, for example, using a reporting module 230, from checkresult data 215 generated from rules consistency checks performed by therule check module 225. Reports can include statistical and quantitativemeasures of style guide rule compliance across a plurality of rules andUIs. For example, a user can request a report showing the number orpercentage of style guide rules violated (or, alternatively, satisfied)by a particular UI or group of UIs. Through such a report, a user canidentify which UIs or UIs groups that are most consistent with a set ofUI style guide rules. Reports can also be generated on a rule-by-rulebasis. For instance, a plurality of UIs within a software environment orapplication can be analyzed to see which UIs are in compliance with asingle style guide rule. In some instances, a report can include styleguide rule consistency measures on an application-by-application basis.For instance, a measure of the style guide consistency of a group of UIsassociated with a particular application can be generated and comparedagainst other applications' UI sets. In still other examples, reportingmodule 230 can calculate and generate reports ranking, filtering, oridentifying particular UIs or UI rules based on style guide consistencychecks. For instance, a listing of the most-violated UI rules can begenerated or a listing of those UIs with the lowest or highest degree ofstyle guide compliance, as examples.

Reporting module 230 can be used in connection with a certificationprocess for applications developed for use within a particular softwareenvironment. For instance, a particular software environment can requirethat applications offered, sold, executed, or otherwise used inconnection comply with a minimum standard of style guide consistency forUIs within the software environment in order to be certified for use inconnection with the environment. For example, UIs within a particularsoftware environment may be required to be in 80% compliance with styleguide rules set forth in connection with the particular softwareenvironment, such as a modular, enterprise software system. Applicationssubmitted, for example, by third-party vendors and developers, can betested for compliance using the rule check module 225, the reportingmodule 230 determining, from the rule check module result data 215, theaggregate compliance of the submitted application's UIs with thesoftware environment's UI style guide rules. In some examples,applications for use within the software environment can be offered fordownload, purchase, subscription, or use through an electronicstorefront, or application store, affiliate with the softwareenvironment. Applications may be required to be certified prior to beingoffered for access through the storefront, a portion of thecertification being tied to UI style guide compliance.

While reports can be generated from previously-collected result data215, reports can also be based on a real time snapshot of UI compliancewith one or more UI style guide rules by one or more UIs. This can beuseful within dynamic software environments where UI attributes andstyle guide rules are frequently evolving, being modified andfine-tuned. Accordingly, to obtain the most accurate reporting data, astyle guide check can be performed using rule check module 225, theresults of the check being immediately passed to reporting module 230for analysis and use in generating a report based on the check.

As noted above, in some instances, administrators or developers of UIswithin a particular software system may desire to modify UI models 205or UI rule check scripts 210 to reflect corresponding modifications toUIs and UI style guide rules respectively. A rule manager 240 can beadapted to perform modifications on UI rule check scripts 210, forinstance, to reflect the addition of a new style guide rule or themodification or deletion of an existing style guide rule. Further,modifications can be made to UI models via a UI model manager 245, forexample, to resolve UI style guide violations in the underlying UIs. Insome cases, UI model manager 245 can modify UI models 205 as a batch,for example, to correct a particular style guide violation common to UIswithin the batch. This can be particularly advantageous in systems wheredozens to thousands of UIs exist that potentially require the same,consistent modification.

Mass changes of UIs (and their corresponding UI models) can be required,for example, by virtue of a change to the UI style guide and,accordingly, UI style guide scripts, given that many UIs within a systemmay have been developed prior to the introduction of the new or modifiedUI style guide rule. As a result, modifying a particular style guiderule or performing a mass (or batch) UI model modification can imposecosts despite the cost savings realized by batch UI modifications.Consequently, it can be useful to survey a set of UIs, in advance of arule change or batch modification to forecast the impact of a particularchange. Accordingly, a planning module 235 can be included within a UIrule engine 200 to perform hypothetical reporting and forecasting ofchanges to UI style guide rules or UI models. For instance, a new styleguide rule may be proposed for a software environment including a set ofexisting UIs. A temporary UI rule check script can be generated,corresponding to and modeling the new rule. The temporary UI rule checkscript can be “temporary” in the sense that the new rule modeled by thetemporary UI rule is only a proposed, hypothetical rule. Accordingly,the temporary UI rule check script modeling the new UI style guide ruleshould not be added to the set of standard UI style guide check scripts210 until the new rule is approved and implemented as one of thestandard UI style guide rules. The temporary UI rule check script can,however, be used to parse the set of existing UI models 205 in a mannersimilar to other UI rule check scripts 210 to determine whether andwhich of the UI models would satisfy the new, proposed style guide rule.Through the generation and execution of a temporary UI rule checkscript, a developer can determine, in advance of a change to a styleguide rule, how many UIs will be affected by the change.

In some implementations, UI rule engine can operate in connection with aUI development tool, such as UI development tool 118, shown in theexample of FIG. 1. Indeed, in some examples, all or a portion of thefunctionality provided though UI rule engine 200 can be integrated intoa UI development tool, for instance, using a UI developer interface 250.A UI developer interface 250 can coordinate communications andoperations performed in connection with a UI development tool. A UIdevelopment tool (such as UI development tool 118) can be a softwareapplication adapted to build, develop, edit, and modify UIs for use withone or more software applications or environments. A UI development toolcan be a design time tool offered, for example, in connection with anintegrated development environment (IDE). Further, in some examples, UIsgenerated or operated upon using an example UI development tool caninclude corresponding UI models. Indeed, a UI development tool cangenerate parsable, design time UI models for use in generating thecorresponding runtime UI.

In typical systems, UI development tools are not tied to UI style guiderules, and UI developers are left unassisted in maintaining anunderstanding of style guide requirements for a particular UI developedfor a particular software system having its own unique style guiderules. Integrating or coupling a UI development tool with UI rule engine200 can allow a UI developer to receive immediate feedback for designdecision implemented or contemplated using a UI development tool. Forinstance, a UI developer may designate, using a UI development tool,that a text form field, button, or other control be positioned in aparticular location of a UI developed using the UI development tool. TheUI development tool may include a graphical representation of the UIbeing built. While the decision of the UI designer to place a particularUI control in a particular location within the UI may be appealing tothe UI designer, the decision may violate a particular UI style guiderule. A user modification of a UI in development using a UI developmenttool can trigger a UI rule consistency check using, for example, rulecheck module 225 and one or more rule check scripts 210. For instance,as a user builds a UI using a UI development tool, a corresponding,parsable UI model can be developed. While the UI model may beincomplete, UI attributes that have been defined in the UI model cannonetheless be parsed, using one or more rule check scripts 210 todetermine whether the defined attributes satisfy one or more UI styleguide rules action. The results of the UI rules consistency check canthen be presented to the user of the UI development tool, via UIdeveloper interface 250, providing immediate feedback to the userregarding the style guide consistency of a UI design choice implementedusing the UI development tool.

In some examples, the nature of the user's actions defining UIattributes using the UI development tool can be used to dynamicallyselect UI rule check scripts 210 determined to be relevant to the user'saction. For instance, in the example of a user defining the number ofcolumns within a table in a UI developed using the UI development tool,the UI developer interface 250 can identify that the user action relatesto table UI elements and dynamically select one or more UI rule checkscripts 210 identified as pertaining to style guide rules definingguidelines for table UI elements. In this manner, the number of UIconsistency checks can be focused to the relevant actions of the UIdevelopment tool user, thereby improving the performance and efficiencyof the UI rule engine's interaction with and service of the UIdevelopment tool.

UI developer interface 250 can also be used to assist a UI developer inunderstanding UI style guide rules relating to a particular UI designproject. For instance, a rule library 255 can be provided withdescriptions detailing particular UI style guide rules. The rule library255 can, in some examples, be a wiki-based guide outlining descriptionsof and known solutions to violations of UI style guide rules, with oneor more users of the UI rule engine 200 providing content to the rulelibrary 255. A user can select a link, for example, to a particular UIstyle guide rule, and access a detailed explanation of the rule, toassist the user in avoiding UI style guide rule violations duringdevelopment. In some examples, the identification of a UI style guiderule can be presented in connection with UI rule consistency checkfeedback provided through the UI developer interface 250 to the UIdevelopment tool, as explained above, for example in connection with aUI design choice implemented using the UI development tool. The feedbackcan include the identification of a UI style guide rule violation,identifying the violated rule. A user can select the identified rule toaccess the rule library 255 content explaining the identified styleguide rule. In this manner, a user can be assisted in understandingstyle guide requirements, as well as understanding how style guideviolations can be remedied (using the UI development tool) and avoided.Such knowledge base functionality can be particularly useful inconnection with systems employing multiple UI designers, includingthird-party UI designers who may develop UIs according to multipledifferent style guides, improving style guide rule compliance througheducation of a particular UI style guide. Further, UI rule engine 200can maintain UI rule check scripts 215 for multiple different styleguides and perform UI style guide compliance checks, reporting,planning, and UI development integration for each of the multipledifferent style guides. Indeed, some UI rule check scripts 215 can bereused across multiple different style guides sharing one or more styleguide rules. Further, a UI developer interface 250 can identify therelevant style guide applying to a particular UI development project,and dynamically select those UI rule check scripts 215 pertaining to theidentified UI style guide.

Turning to FIG. 4, a design-time UI model 205, generated, for example,using a UI development tool, can define attributes of a UI 415 of aparticular software application 410. The UI model 205 can be an XMLfile, or some other parsable file, that can define and identify, to a UIgeneration engine 405, the attributes to be included in a particular UI.The UI model snippet 305 of FIG. 3B is but one example of a parsable UImodel file. A UI generation engine 405 can build the UI 415corresponding to and defined by the UI model 205 by parsing the UI modelto identify the set of attributes defined for the UI and build the UI byconstructing the UI from UI elements and definitions specified in theattributes defined in the UI model. In such examples, modifications madeto the UI model 205 can propagate to the runtime instances of thecorresponding UI 415, further illustrating the advantage to using UImodels to implement batch modifications, or edits, based, for example,on remedying UI style guide rule violations.

Turning now to FIG. 5A, a flowchart 500 a is shown of an exampletechnique for checking attributes of a UI for compliance with one ormore UI style guide rules. At least one particular digital UI model in aplurality of digital UI models can be identified 502, each of the UImodels defining attributes of at least one UI in a plurality of UIs. Theparticular digital UI model can correspond to and represent attributesof a particular UI in the plurality of UIs. The particular UI model canbe parsed 504 to identify the attributes of the particular UI todetermine 506 whether the attributes of the particular UI satisfy aparticular UI style guide rule in a plurality of UI style guide rules.In some instances, a particular UI check script, modeling the particularUI style guide rule, can be used to parse 504 the UI model and determine506 whether the attributes of the particular UI satisfy the particularUI style guide rule. Style guide check result data can be generated 508identifying whether the at least one particular UI model satisfies theparticular UI style guide rule.

A UI style guide consistency check can check one or more UI modelsagainst one or more UI style guide rules (using one or morecorresponding UI rule check scripts). For example, defined sets of UIscan be checked as a group, such as a set of UIs of a particular type, UIdeveloped by a particular developer, or UIs of a particular application,among other examples. In some instances, a plurality of UIs can bechecked against one or more UI style guide rules. Further, a singlesystem can include thousands of UIs. In typical UI development, hundredsof man hours can be spent manually checking UIs for compliance withstyle guide requirements. In some instances, given the cost of checkingeach UI for style guide compliance, a UI administrator may only be ableto spot check UIs, leaving the possibility that several style guideviolations may not be identified and remedied prior to the UIs beingreleased for commercial runtime consumption. Using the conceptsdescribed above, large batches of parsable UI models can be parsed,identifying attributes of the represented UI. The attributes can then beexamined to determine which attributes of which UIs in the batch complyor do not comply with which UI style guide rules. Indeed, an entire setof UIs can be checked for compliance with UI style guide rules in asingle batch check, reducing the time necessary to ensure UI style guidecompliance to a fraction of the time typically spent manually checkingduring typical UI development efforts.

One or more UIs, or a batch of UIs, can be checked against one or moreUI style guide rules during a single style guide compliance check. A setof UI style guide rules can be identified to serve as the basis of a UIstyle guide consistency check. For instance, a particular category ofstyle guide rules, or set of style guide rules associated with aparticular developer or company can be bundled together withcorresponding UI rule check scripts for use in a particular style guidecompliance check. Indeed, one or more UIs can be checked against anentire set of UI style guide rules. Each corresponding UI model can beparsed by a corresponding UI rule check script corresponding to the setof UI style guide rules. Indeed, in some examples, parsing of multipleUI models by multiple UI rule check scripts can be performed in parallelto expedite performance of the entire consistency check. For example,checking can begin with a first UI rule check script parsing a first UImodel in parallel with a second UI rule check script parsing a second UImodel. Later, the first UI rule check script can parse the second UImodel in parallel with the second UI rule check script parsing the firstUI model, and so on. In some implementations, style guide consistencychecks can be further expedited by first matching UI style guide ruleswith UIs to which the UI style guide rules are relevant, prior toexecuting the UI rule check scripts to parse the corresponding UImodels. For instance, a first UI may include a table UI component, whilea second UI may not. Accordingly, in the set of UI style guide rulesagainst which the consistency check is to be performed, one or more UIstyle guide rules may apply to table UI components. By first identifyingthat the second UI does not include a table UI component, parsing of theUI model corresponding to the second UI by the table-related UI rulecheck scripts can be avoided, with the table-related UI rule checkscripts only parsing those UI models that include table UI components.Indeed, in any UI rule consistency check, parsing of UI models can bepreceded by filtering the set of UI models for attributes related to theUI style guide rule to be checked.

In response to receiving data identifying results of a particular styleguide consistency check, one or more UI attributes can be identifiedthat violate one or more of the checked UI style guide rules. In someinstances, the perceived seriousness of a particular style guideviolation can also be identified and presented to the user to assist theuser in assessing how to address the violation. Indeed, a user cantrigger resolution of the one or more style guide violations in responseto being notified of the violations. A resolution can be as simple as,for example, receiving a user request to ignore an identified styleguide violation. Allowing a user to ignore a style guide violationprovides for the sometimes needed flexibility for a particular UI to bedeveloped with attributes that are an exception to a particularone-size-fits-all style guide rule, for example. A user, upon reviewinga particular style guide violation can, for instance, determine that theviolation is not serious, accurate, or appropriate for a particular UI.Receiving a user request to ignore a particular style guide violationcan cause future checks to ignore the violation as well.

In other instances, identification of a UI style guide rule violationcan motivate the user to access the offending UI model and edit the UImodel to redefine the offending UI attribute to bring the correspondingUI in compliance with the violated style guide rule. Redefining of theUI model to bring the UI model in compliance with a particular UI styleguide rule can also be automated and performed by instructions executedby one or more computing devices. Further, where multiple UI models havebeen identified as violating UI style guide rules, one or more knownsolutions to the violation can be identified and performed on each ofthe offending UI models as a batch to consistently remedy the one ormore violations across the batch of UIs. A solution can be identified orgenerated, dynamically, by one or more computing devices, or,alternatively, by the user, specifying how the offending UI modelsshould be modified in response to the detect UI style guide violations.In one example, a common style guide error relating to the namingconvention of certain button UI control elements can be identified inseveral UIs. For instance, a particular style guide rule can specifythat button UI controls used to start a process be labeled “Start.”Through a UI style guide consistency check of the particular style guiderule, it can be identified that several UIs labeled the button UIcontrol “Go,” rather than “Start,” in violation of the style guide rule.Amending the definition of the button's labeling can be accomplished byidentifying and amending a line of code with each offending UI'srespective UI model. Accordingly, an instruction can be executed toautomatically identify each of the UI models of the offending UIs,identify the offending attribute in each UI model, and amend theoffending attribute in each UI model to re-label each button “Start,”rather than “Go.” By so doing, common UI style guide violations can beboth detected and remedied by performing batch check and modificationoperations on, sometimes, large sets of UIs via parsable UI models ofthe UIs.

Turning to FIG. 5B, a flowchart 500 b shows an example technique forchecking attributes of a UI for compliance with one or more UI styleguide rules in connection with an example UI development tool. At leastone particular digital UI model in a plurality of digital UI models canbe identified 510, the particular UI model currently accessed by an UIdevelopment tool, such as a UI development tool integrated with a UIrule engine (such as described above) or one or more UI rule checkscripts. In some instances, the particular UI model before the UIdevelopment tool can be modified 512 using the UI development tool. Themodification to the particular UI model can correspond to a desiredmodification of a particular UI modeled by the particular UI model. Amodified version of the particular UI can be parsed 514 to determinewhether the modified particular UI violates at least one particular userinterface style guide rule in a plurality of user interface style guiderules. The results of the parsing (i.e., the UI style guide ruleconsistency check) can then be presented 516 in a user interface of theUI development tool as feedback to the UI development tool userregarding the modification to the particular UI model.

The UI development tool can be directly integrated with thefunctionality of software implementing UI style guide consistencychecks. For instance, UI rule check scripts can be integrated into theUI development tool, allowing the UI development tool to triggerexecution of one or more UI rule check scripts to parse the UI model ofa UI currently edited or under development using a UI development tool.Execution of one or more UI rule check scripts through a UI developmenttool can be triggered, for example, in response to a user request toperform a style guide consistency check or automatically, in response toa UI development tool event. For instance, user can perform operationsusing the UI development tool to modify and define attributes of a UI.Such operations can trigger style guide consistency checks to check themodified UI against the style guide rule. Further, detected style guideviolations can be conveniently resolved using the UI development tool,where the user can directly redefine aspects of the UIs underlying UImodel. In some instance, UI development tools can highlight or providedirection to the user to implement a resolution to a detected UI styleguide rule violation. For instance, the UI development tool canhighlight a UI component relating to an offending UI attribute or launcha help tool to suggest known remedies for the particular style guideviolation.

FIG. 5C illustrates a flowchart 500 c of an example technique forgenerating UI rule consistency statistics based on checks of UI modelsrepresenting UIs in a software environment. Generating rule consistencystatistics can be performed, for example, using a reporting module of anexample UI rule engine. At least one UI model can be parsed 522 todetermine whether a corresponding user interface, in a plurality of userinterfaces within a software environment, satisfies at least a first UIstyle guide rule in a plurality of UI style guide rules associated withthe software environment, the particular digital UI model defining aplurality of attributes of the particular user interface. At least onestatistical measure can be calculated 522 relating to particular UI'scompliance with UI style guide rules. The statistical measure can becalculated 522 based at least in part on the determination 520 ofwhether the particular UI satisfies the first UI style guide rule. Areport can be generated 524 including the calculated statisticalmeasure. The generated report can be adapted for presentation to a user,for instance, using a GUI.

Reports can be generated that include a wide variety of statisticalmeasures based on the results of one or more style guide consistencychecks, including consistency checks launched in connection with areporting request. Reports can provide style guide violation statisticsat the UI level, identifying style guide violations or style guide rulecompliance rates for each UI, UI type, UI grouping, or UI componentchecked for style guide compliance. For instance, an aggregatecompliance rate can be calculated for a particular UI based on the UI'scompliance with a set of UI style guide rules. Style guide compliancetrends can also be calculated and reported. For instance, common styleguide violations can be identified for logical groupings of UI. Forinstance, a set of UIs developed by a particular vendor or associatedwith a particular software application can be analyzed to see ifrecurring violations of one or more style guide rules exist across theset of UIs. Further, rule-based statistics can be calculated, forinstance, to identify the rate of compliance with each UI style guiderule in a set of UI style guide rules. UI style guide rules and UIs canbe ranked or graded based on compliance statistics. For instance, amost-violated set of UI rules can be identified. This can be useful, forinstance, in identifying style guide rules that are poorly defined,impractical, or outdated. Alternatively, reports showing style guiderules with poor compliance can serve as the basis of traininginitiatives designed to better educate participating UI designers withregard to the oft-violated rule. Further, a low compliance rate can alsosuggest potential errors in UI rule check scripts used to detectviolations of the underlying UI style guide rule.

UI models and UI rule check scripts can be also used to produce data forreports not directly related to style guide rule violations. Forinstance, parsing of a UI model by a UI rule check script can result inthe detection of the presence (or absence) of particular UI attributegenerally with the UI model. Accordingly, reports can be generated,based on these findings, that compile statistics regarding the generalfrequency of a UI attribute or UI component's inclusion in UIs within asoftware environment. For instance, a UI rule check script relating todrop-down UI menus can identify those UI models including such elements.As a result, the number or percentage of UIs in the system that includedrop-down menus can be quickly discovered for potentially large sets ofUIs within a system.

FIG. 5D illustrates a flowchart 500 d of an example technique forforecasting effects of a change involving one or more UI style guiderules. At least one proposed user interface style guide rule can beidentified 530, for example in a request to forecast the effect ofimplementing the proposed user interface style guide rule. The proposeduser interface style guide rule can apply to at least one user interfacein a plurality of user interfaces for use in connection with at leastone software application. Each user interface in the plurality of userinterfaces can have an associated digital UI model representingattributes of the respective user interface. At least one of these UImodels can be parsed 532, for example by a UI rule check scriptgenerated for the proposed user interface style guide rule, to determinewhether attributes of the particular user interface would violate theproposed user interface style guide rule. Data identifying the resultsof the consistency check can be sent 534 identifying whether the atleast one particular user interface in the plurality of user interfaceswould violate the at least one proposed user interface style guide rule.

As in other examples, hypothetical style guide rule consistency checkscan be carried out on a batch-basis across multiple UI models. Further,consistency checks can be limited, as in other examples, to UI modelsdynamically identified as potentially affected by the proposed UI styleguide rule. Proposed UI style guide rules can represent potential newstyle guide rules, or potential modifications or deletions of existingstyle guide rules. A hypothetical style guide rule consistency checkbased on one or more proposed UI style guide rules can be used in aplanning phase, prior to the formal adoption of the proposed rules.Accordingly, in addition to identifying the potential effect theadoption of a particular proposed UI style guide rule would have on aset of UIs, a cost of implementing the proposed UI style guide rule canalso be calculated. For instance, potential violations of the proposedUI style guide rule can be detected through a hypothetical style guiderule consistency check. The severity of the violation can also beidentified. A cost, or grade, assigning a quantitative measure to thepotential effect of adopting a proposed UI style guide rule, can becalculated based both on the number and the severity of the detected,potential violations of the rule detected during the check. Suchquantitative measures can be used by administrators in their decision toadopt and deploy a particular proposed UI style guide rule.

Adoption of a proposed UI style guide rule can result in the addition ofa corresponding rule check script to a plurality of UI rule checkscripts. Further, subsequent UI style guide consistency checks can checkUIs' continued compliance with the newly-adopted UI style guide rulefollowing adoption of the rule. Indeed, modification operations can beperformed across one or more UI models found to violate a newly-adoptedUI style guide rule in order to bring offending UIs in compliance withthe new rule.

FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate example screenshots of UIs used in connectionwith an example UI rules engine. FIG. 6A, for example, illustrates apresentation of UI style guide consistency check results. Varying levelsof detail can be presented for results of a style guide consistencycheck. In the example of FIG. 6A, at least a portion of a listing ofstyle guide consistency check results is presented to a user. Thelisting, in this particular example, includes an identification of theoffending UI attribute 602 as well as an identification 604 of thedetected inconsistencies with the style guide rules. In this example,both style guide “violations” and “warnings” have been detected. A“violation” can indicate that a violation of a style guide rule has beendetected for the corresponding UI attribute. A “warning,” can, forinstance, instead indicate that UIs in a set of UIs attempt to complywith a particular style guide rule in an inconsistent manner, or in amanner technically in keeping with the style guide rule but otherwisebordering on a violation of the rule. Additionally, the listing caninclude identifications 606 of a calculated or assigned priority leveldetermined for the detected inconsistency or violation, as well as amessage 608 describing the nature of the violation and/or violated UIstyle guide rule. The priority level 606 can be pre-assigned toviolations of a particular type or dynamically determined based onfactors including how the offending UI attribute violated thecorresponding UI style guide rule, how many times the rule was violated,a deployment schedule for the corresponding UI, or how many otherviolations were detected for a particular UI or UI attribute, amongother examples.

As shown in the screenshot 600 a of FIG. 6A, data can be maintainedrelating to the nature and characteristics of a particular UI attribute602. For instance, the type of UI 610 to which the UI attribute appliescan be maintained, as well as presented in a listing of style guideconsistency check results to assist the user in detecting style guideconsistency trends across the set of results. Similarly, a softwareapplication using the offending UI can also be identified 612. In otherexamples, style guide consistency check results can further includeother columns, fields, and information not shown in the example of FIG.6A, including an identification of the UI model, an identification ofthe particular violated UI style guide rule, a directory address of theoffending UI or UI attribute, tools for launching remedies for thedetected style guide rule violations, identification of developersresponsible for developing or last-modifying the particular UIattribute, the date of the UI's last modification, among other features.Still other examples can provide less-detailed representations ofresults of style guide consistency checks, such as the links to anoffending UI model, links to descriptions of individual style guideviolations, or by graphically highlighting offending UI elements orlines of code in UI models representing an offending UI attribute, asbut some examples.

Turning to FIG. 6B, a screenshot 600 b is shown of an example interfaceof a UI development tool integrated with style guide rule checkingfunctionality. One or more windows 620, 622 can be provided for use inmodifying attributes of a UI using the UI development tool. Forinstance, a window 620 can be provided presenting a representation ofthe UI under development using the UI development tool. The window 620can present a representation of the UI as it would be presented to auser. A user-developer can specify attributes of the UI by adjusting UIelements within the representation presented in window 620.Alternatively, a user can also specify UI attribute values in window622. Modifications to the UI made in either window 620 or 622 can bereflected in the other window. For instance, a modification made to theUI representation in window 620 can change a corresponding attribute ofthe UI, the change being reflected automatically in window 622.Additionally, changes made to attributes of a particular UI using UIdevelopment tool windows 620 or 622 can result in a correspondingmodifications being made to at least one particular UI modelcorresponding to the particular UI. The UI model can be parsed to checkthe modified UI for compliance with one or more UI style guide rules.

As shown in FIG. 6B, an additional window 624 can be presented to a userin connection with a UI development tool interface, the window 624presenting results of at least one style guide consistency check on theUI developed using the UI development tool. A user can filter results ofthe style guide consistency analysis using controls 625, for example, tofilter results by violation, warning, among other examples. The resultslisting presented in window 624 can include an indication of whether astyle guide consistency warning (e.g., 626 a) or violation (e.g., 626 b)was detected, together with an identification 628 of the detected styleguide inconsistency and description 630 or other message relating to thedetected inconsistency. An identification of the offending UI attributeas well as the path 632 to the attribute in the corresponding UI modelcan be presented in the window 624. Additionally, controls 634 can beprovided allowing users to designate that a detected violation in thelisting should either be ignored or confirmed as an incident for laterresolution. Indeed, in some examples, a user can immediately remedy anidentified style guide inconsistency using the UI development tool bymodifying the offending UI attributes to bring them in compliance withthe violated UI style guide rule.

FIG. 6C illustrates a screenshot 600 c of a presentation of detectedhypothetical UI style guide violations of a set of proposed UI styleguide rules (detected, for example, using corresponding UI style guiderule check scripts). A listing 640 is shown, generated in response toone or more user requests to forecast the effects of adopting aplurality of proposed UI style guide rules, including new and modifiedstyle guide rules. Each row (e.g., 648, 652) in the listing 640 cancorrespond to a distinct proposed UI style guide rule. Information canbe presented, relating to each proposed UI style guide rule, such as amessage 642 identifying or describing the proposed UI style guide rule,an application, category, or “area” 644 of the UIs found that wouldviolate the proposed rule, and a count 646 of the number of potentialviolations detected by checking the UI models for violations of theproposed style guide rules. For instance, a row 648 in listing 640 canrelate to a UI style guide rule specifying the correct placement of a“Send” button within a UI for which ten potential violations wereidentified (i.e. in column 646) within a set of UIs.

Additional details can also be made available to users surveying theresults of the forecasted effect of adopting proposed UI style guiderules. For instance, an expansion control (e.g., 650) can be used toexpand a row and display additional information relating to a particularanalysis of a proposed UI style guide rule. For instance, the expansioncontrol 650 of row 652 has been selected in the screenshot 600 cdisplaying additional details to a user relating to the proposed rule ofrow 652. For instance, a listing of a plurality of UI categories (e.g.,654) can be presented that would be affected by a proposed UI styleguide rule relating to making inclusion of a “Save/Close” buttonmandatory. The expanded details can further include presentation of thenumber of potential violations detected in each UI category. Forexample, a sub-row 654 corresponding to a “FIN” UI category can indicatethat eighteen separate violations of the “Save/Close” button rule wereidentified in UIs of category “FIN.” A UI category can, in someinstances, correspond to a particular software application. Depending onthe needs of the user, a user can further expand the presentation offorecast information by selecting expansion control 656, for instance,to expand forecast statistics relating to a UI category, such as todisplay identifications of individual UIs or UI attributes that wouldviolate the proposed UI style guide rule of row 652 within category“FIN.” Similar details can be identified for each of the UI style guiderows and UI categories. The screenshot 600 c of FIG. 6C, as well as thescreenshots 600 a, 600 b of FIGS. 6A-6B, are presented as illustrativeexamples only, and numerous additional and alternative interfaceconfigurations and functionality can be implemented to assist users inrealizing the features described above.

Although this disclosure has been described in terms of certainimplementations and generally associated methods, alterations andpermutations of these implementations and methods will be apparent tothose skilled in the art. For example, the actions described herein canbe performed in a different order than as described and still achievethe desirable results. As one example, the processes depicted in theaccompanying figures do not necessarily require the particular ordershown, or sequential order, to achieve the desired results. In certainimplementations, multitasking and parallel processing may beadvantageous. Additionally, other user interface layouts andfunctionality can be supported. Other variations are within the scope ofthe following claims.

1. A computer-implemented method comprising: parsing a first digital UImodel in a plurality of digital UI models, to determine whether a firstuser interface, in a plurality of user interfaces within a softwareenvironment, satisfies at least a first UI style guide rule in aplurality of UI style guide rules associated with the softwareenvironment, the first digital UI model defining a plurality ofattributes of the first user interface; calculating at least onestatistical measure relating to compliance with UI style guide rulesbased at least in part on the determination of whether the first userinterface satisfies the first UI style guide rule; and generatingreporting data identifying the at least one statistical measure, thereporting data configured for presentation on a user interface of acomputing device.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first digital UImodel is parsed by executing a first UI rule check script, in aplurality of UI rule check scripts, corresponding to the first UI styleguide rule, wherein each UI rule check script in the plurality of UIrule check scripts corresponds to at least one UI style guide rule inthe plurality of user interface style guide rules and is adapted, whenexecuted by at least one processor device, to parse UI models todetermine whether user interface attributes modeled by the UI modelsviolate the UI style guide rule corresponding to the UI rule checkscript.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the statistical measurerelates to compliance of a first set of user interfaces in the pluralityof user interfaces with a set of UI style guide rules included in theplurality of UI style guide rules, wherein the first set of userinterfaces includes the first user interface and at least one othersecond user interface and the set of UI style guide rules at leastinclude the first UI style guide rule.
 4. The method of claim 3, whereindigital UI models corresponding to each user interface in the first setof user interfaces is parsed to determine whether attributes of thecorresponding user interface defined by the UI model satisfy at leastthe first UI style guide rule.
 5. The method of claim 3, wherein thestatistical measure includes an aggregate degree of compliance with theset of UI style guide rules by user interfaces in the first set of userinterfaces.
 6. The method of claim 3, wherein the first set of userinterfaces corresponds to user interfaces of a first softwareapplication.
 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the statistical measureincludes an aggregate degree of compliance with the set of UI styleguide rules by user interfaces in the first set of user interfaces, themethod further comprising: determining that the calculated aggregatedegree of compliance by the first set of user interfaces exceeds athreshold value; and sending data approving runtime use of the firstsoftware application based, at least in part, on the determination thatthe calculated aggregate degree of compliance by the first set of userinterfaces exceeds a threshold value.
 8. The method of claim 7, furthercomprising: authorizing marketing of the first software application inan electronic storefront based, at least in part, on the determinationthat the calculated aggregate degree of compliance by the first set ofuser interfaces exceeds a threshold value.
 9. The method of claim 3,wherein the statistical measure further relates to compliance of asecond set of user interfaces in the plurality of user interfaces withthe set of UI style guide rules, the second set of user interfacescorresponding to user interfaces of a second software application, thereporting data identifying overall compliance with the set of UI styleguide rules by user interfaces of each of the first and second softwareapplications.
 10. The method of claim 3, wherein the set of UI styleguide rules includes at least two UI style guide rules in the pluralityof UI style guide rules.
 11. The method of claim 9, wherein the set ofUI style guide rules includes the plurality of UI style guide rules andthe first set of user interfaces includes the plurality of userinterfaces.
 12. The method of claim 10, wherein the statistical measureincludes an identification of a most-violated UI style guide rule in theplurality of UI style guide rules by user interfaces in the plurality ofuser interfaces.
 13. The method of claim 9, wherein the statisticalmeasure includes an identification, for each UI style guide rule in theset of UI style guide rules, of a degree of compliance with therespective UI style guide rule by user interfaces in the set of userinterfaces.
 14. The method of claim 1, wherein the first UI style guiderule is included in a set of UI style guide rules including at least oneother UI style guide rule from the plurality of UI style guide rules,the first digital UI model is parsed to determine whether the first userinterface satisfies each UI style guide rule in the set of UI styleguide rules, and calculating the at least one statistical measure isfurther based on the determination of whether the first user interfacesatisfies each UI style guide rule in the set of UI style guide rules.15. The method of claim 13, wherein the statistical measure includes anaggregate degree of compliance with the set of UI style guide rules bythe first user interface.
 16. The method of claim 14, furthercomprising: determining that the calculated aggregate degree ofcompliance by the first user interface exceeds a threshold value; andsending data approving runtime use of the first user interface withinthe software environment.
 17. The method of claim 13, wherein the set ofUI style guide rules is a first set of UI style guide rulescorresponding to a first category of UI style guide rules, at least asecond UI style guide is included in a second set of UI style guiderules corresponding to a second category of UI style guide rules, andthe statistical measure includes an aggregate degree of compliance withthe first category of UI style guide rules by at least the first userinterface and an aggregate degree of compliance with the second categoryof UI style guide rules by at least the first user interface.
 18. Themethod of claim 1, wherein each UI style guide rule relates to userexperience design guidelines for user interfaces in the softwareenvironment.
 19. An article comprising a non-transitory,machine-readable storage device storing instructions operable to causeat least one processor to perform operations comprising: parsing a firstdigital UI model in a plurality of digital UI models, to determinewhether a first user interface, in a plurality of user interfaces withina software environment, satisfies at least a first UI style guide rulein a plurality of UI style guide rules associated with the softwareenvironment, the first digital UI model defining a plurality ofattributes of the first user interface; calculating at least onestatistical measure relating to compliance with UI style guide rulesbased at least in part on the determination of whether the first userinterface satisfies the first UI style guide rule; and generatingreporting data identifying the at least one statistical measure, thereporting data configured for presentation on a user interface of acomputing device.
 20. A system comprising: at least one data repositoryincluding: a plurality of digital UI models, each UI model identifyingattributes of at least one user interface in a plurality of userinterfaces; and a plurality of plurality of UI rule check scripts, eachUI rule check script in the plurality of UI rule check scriptscorresponding to at least one UI style guide rule in a plurality of UIstyle guide rules, each UI rule check script configured, when executedby at least one processing device, to parse digital UI models anddetermine whether user interface attributes modeled by corresponding UImodels satisfy the UI style guide rule corresponding to the executed UIrule check script; and a UI style guide reporting engine, including atleast one processing device, configured to: perform a UI style guidecompliance analysis by executing at least one particular UI rule checkscript, in the plurality of UI rule check scripts, corresponding to atleast one particular UI style guide rule to parse at least oneparticular digital UI model in the plurality of digital UI models, todetermine whether the at least one particular user interface, modeled bythe at least one particular digital UI model, satisfies the at least oneparticular UI style guide rule; calculating at least one statisticalmeasure based at least in part on the based on the performed UI styleguide compliance analysis; and generating reporting data identifying theat least one statistical measure, the reporting data configured forpresentation on a user interface of a computing device.